Fundamentalism UnPacked: Beliefs, Power & Impact by Atifa

00:56:42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyJGuaoA5SM

Resumo

TLDRThis masterclass session, hosted by Isa, covers various aspects of fundamentalism, focusing on its definitions, historical roots, and its proliferation in contemporary society. It examines the interplay between fundamentalism, political structures, and the impact of modernization, specifically in the context of the United States. The session also delves into the reactionary nature of fundamentalism, discussing how it manifests across various religions, including Christianity and Islam. With an emphasis on theories within political development, the session encourages critical thought on the implications of fundamentalism in contemporary debates and governance, ultimately providing insights for application in future discussions.

Conclusões

  • 📖 Definition of Fundamentalism: A strict belief in the inherent truth of religious texts.
  • 🌍 Historical Context: 1920s saw fundamentalism rise due to reactions against modernization.
  • 🔍 Key Mechanism: Violence against perceived threats to traditional beliefs.
  • ✝️ Christian vs. Islamic Fundamentalism: Both exhibit similar patterns in resisting modernity.
  • 📉 Political Nature: Fundamentalism often intersects with governance, influencing political behavior.
  • 🛡️ Defense Mechanism: Fundamentalism can increase in response to fear of losing religious identity.
  • 🔄 Reactionary Nature: Fundamentalism is often a response to change rather than an ideological stance.
  • 💡 Modernization's Impact: Growing secularism challenges but does not eliminate fundamental tendencies.
  • 🌐 Global Phenomenon: Fundamentalism exists in various cultures and religions beyond Christianity.
  • 📊 Relevance in Debates: Understanding fundamentalism is crucial for navigating political and social discussions.

Linha do tempo

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    The session begins with an introduction to Atifa Van, a member of the Malaysian team, and the seminar topic of 'Fundamentalism Unpacked: Beliefs, Power, and Impact'. Isa, an IM student and speaker, shares his background and sets the agenda for the lecture focusing on defining fundamentalism and its significance in political landscapes.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    Isa references Jonathan J. Edwards' definition of fundamentalism, emphasizing the belief in the inherent truth of scripture, the idea of premillennialism, and the unquestionable nature of these beliefs. The session outlines how fundamentalism often arises in reaction to perceived threats against shared beliefs, leading to collective movements.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    The structure of the lecture continues with an exploration of how fundamentalism manifests and mobilizes, guided by community intimacy, recognition of threats, and unified actions against this perceived negation. The speaker relates this to both religious movements and wider social movements like Black Lives Matter.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:20:00

    As the discussion evolves, Isa elaborates on the historical context of fundamentalism, contrasting its rise in the US and UK, while underscoring the influence of modernity and tradition on its development, positing that fundamentalism often functions in reaction to modernization, using the US Protestant movement as a primary example.

  • 00:20:00 - 00:25:00

    The lecture then transitions to discuss the growth of fundamentalism in the 20th century, driven partly by the industrialization and modernization of society, and the particular cultural pockets formed among Protestant communities. Isa notes the role of the interchurch movement in this context and the push against centralization.

  • 00:25:00 - 00:30:00

    Isa contrasts the acceptance of modernization in Catholicism versus the resistance in Protestantism, highlighting fundamentalism's roots and development in America during the 1920s. The interchurch movement is described as a threat to individual church autonomy, fueling the rise of fundamentalism as a counter movement.

  • 00:30:00 - 00:35:00

    In discussing fundamentalism today, Isa argues that events such as 9/11 and the Trump presidency reflect a revival of fundamentalist sentiments as political identities became intertwined with religious ideologies. The speaker cites fundamentalism's defensive nature and its resurgence in political discourse during contemporary times.

  • 00:35:00 - 00:40:00

    Isa presents the notion that fundamentalism is often reactionary, emerging in response to perceived threats from modernity and secularism. This creates a cycle of rise and fall, with each new societal challenge reinvigorating fundamentalist ideologies, particularly in the context of identity politics.

  • 00:40:00 - 00:45:00

    The conversation then shifts to fundamentalism outside of Christianity, discussing examples like Islamic fundamentalism, Hindu nationalism, and their manifestations across different cultures and political systems, illustrating that fundamentalism is not confined to one religion.

  • 00:45:00 - 00:50:00

    The lecture concludes with a discussion on applying the understanding of fundamentalism in debate motions, framing debates around religious authority, the implications of religious education, and the impacts of secular governance, emphasizing the inherent connection between fundamental beliefs and political power.

  • 00:50:00 - 00:56:42

    Finally, the audience is engaged through questions and discussions about the definitions and implications of fundamentalism, the influence of modernity, and the political nature of fundamentalist movements. The session wraps up with thanks and acknowledgment of Isa's insightful presentation.

Mostrar mais

Mapa mental

Vídeo de perguntas e respostas

  • What is fundamentalism?

    Fundamentalism is often defined as a strict adherence to specific theological doctrines, particularly in relation to scripture, where followers believe their religious texts are inherently true and beyond question.

  • How did the 1920s influence the rise of fundamentalism?

    The 1920s saw significant modernization, prompting a reactionary movement among certain Protestant groups in the US, who felt marginalized by centralized religious movements.

  • Is fundamentalism solely a Christian phenomenon?

    No, fundamentalism exists in many religions, including Islam (e.g., Islamic fundamentalism) and Hinduism (e.g., Hindutva).

  • How does fundamentalism relate to modernity?

    Fundamentalism often emerges in reaction to modernity, with fundamentalists striving to return to what they see as traditional practices and beliefs.

  • What role does fear play in the rise of fundamentalist movements?

    Fear of losing religious identity or moral decay often motivates individuals to adopt fundamentalist beliefs as a form of defensive reaction.

Ver mais resumos de vídeos

Obtenha acesso instantâneo a resumos gratuitos de vídeos do YouTube com tecnologia de IA!
Legendas
en
Rolagem automática:
  • 00:00:05
    hello and welcome you all to the ideal
  • 00:00:07
    master class with atifa Van just to give
  • 00:00:10
    a bit of idea of who they are they are
  • 00:00:12
    the member of the maladian team of w WC
  • 00:00:16
    of 2025 and they were the fifth best ESL
  • 00:00:19
    speaker and the session that they are
  • 00:00:21
    going to take today is fundamentalism
  • 00:00:23
    unct beliefs power and impact we are so
  • 00:00:26
    happy to have you here and hoping to
  • 00:00:29
    have a wonderful session handing it over
  • 00:00:33
    TOA hi everyone so my name Isa a quick
  • 00:00:37
    introduction um I'm an IM student I
  • 00:00:40
    competed at WDC and alhamdulillah
  • 00:00:43
    managed to break and yeah I'm here to
  • 00:00:47
    teach on fundamentalism tonight so I'm
  • 00:00:50
    gonna quickly share my screen I'm not oh
  • 00:00:54
    yeah I do have permission one
  • 00:00:57
    second okay I need to send a request
  • 00:00:59
    first
  • 00:01:13
    okay all right so it's just
  • 00:01:17
    a one
  • 00:01:24
    slide all right just checking that my
  • 00:01:26
    screen can be seen
  • 00:01:33
    um it isn't visible it's not visible
  • 00:01:36
    yeah it's just showing that you have
  • 00:01:37
    started your screen sharing so would you
  • 00:01:39
    mind do it again yeah it's it's visible
  • 00:01:42
    now oh wait I think I know what the
  • 00:01:44
    problem
  • 00:01:46
    is it's visible
  • 00:01:49
    now uh yeah but if I full screen you
  • 00:01:51
    can't see anymore right can you see it
  • 00:01:53
    now no no we did uh can you try a full
  • 00:01:55
    screening
  • 00:01:56
    now yeah it's on full screen now can you
  • 00:01:58
    see it yeah n
  • 00:02:00
    works all right okay so what I'm going
  • 00:02:04
    to be teaching tonight is fundamentalism
  • 00:02:07
    unpacked beliefs power and impacts so a
  • 00:02:10
    quick backstory I was inspired to do
  • 00:02:12
    this based on my class for theories of
  • 00:02:14
    political
  • 00:02:15
    development where we kind of just
  • 00:02:17
    learned about like how different
  • 00:02:19
    countries develop in general and what
  • 00:02:22
    factors can lead to that development one
  • 00:02:24
    of them being religion especially when
  • 00:02:26
    it comes to nation building the way that
  • 00:02:28
    National politics looks can vary vastly
  • 00:02:32
    based on what the voter landscape is and
  • 00:02:36
    when religion is involved even in more
  • 00:02:38
    secular states such as the us or the UK
  • 00:02:40
    um those things still have very very
  • 00:02:42
    prominent impacts towards the political
  • 00:02:44
    landscape of said country so the first
  • 00:02:48
    thing that I kind of want to think about
  • 00:02:49
    is what do you think about when you hear
  • 00:02:51
    the term fundamentalism so let's just
  • 00:02:53
    like think about it for a second and you
  • 00:02:56
    guys are free to like pop up raise your
  • 00:02:58
    hand and share what you think
  • 00:02:59
    fundamentalism is before we start just
  • 00:03:01
    so I can get a gist of what our
  • 00:03:03
    beginning ideas are coming into this
  • 00:03:19
    lecture yeah sure go ahead your
  • 00:03:26
    te oh there's a chat okay I don't know
  • 00:03:29
    if you can see if I open the chat yeah
  • 00:03:31
    fixed ideology I think we to anyone
  • 00:03:42
    else yeah I think when we think of uh
  • 00:03:45
    fundamentalism The Habit that we kind of
  • 00:03:48
    jump into is simply the idea of religion
  • 00:03:51
    full stop so what we're going to cover
  • 00:03:54
    in this lecture is to what extent does
  • 00:03:57
    fundamentalism actually expand and
  • 00:03:59
    through like these mechanisms that we
  • 00:04:02
    learn of fundamentalism expanding we're
  • 00:04:04
    going to try and apply that to actual
  • 00:04:07
    debate motions near the end so here's
  • 00:04:11
    the oh here's the agenda or like the
  • 00:04:14
    contents of tonight's lecture the first
  • 00:04:16
    thing we're going to do is to Define
  • 00:04:17
    fundamentalism so this is not just
  • 00:04:19
    defining fundamentalism itself it's also
  • 00:04:21
    like how fundamentalism forms and what
  • 00:04:24
    theories are out there about
  • 00:04:26
    fundamentalism if you're unclear what
  • 00:04:27
    fundamentalism is it'll be explained in
  • 00:04:29
    a second so don't worry the second is on
  • 00:04:31
    the origins of fundamentalism where it
  • 00:04:33
    came from how it expanded and how it got
  • 00:04:35
    to where it is today third is the growth
  • 00:04:37
    of fundamentalism where it stands now
  • 00:04:40
    lastly the last two things are going to
  • 00:04:41
    be fundamentalism Beyond Christianity
  • 00:04:43
    because the study of fundamentalism is
  • 00:04:46
    mostly on Christianity but we're going
  • 00:04:48
    to see how it applies to other religions
  • 00:04:49
    and whether or not they follow the same
  • 00:04:50
    pattern and lastly is the conclusion and
  • 00:04:53
    key takeaways and that's where we're
  • 00:04:54
    going to try and apply everything that
  • 00:04:56
    we learn to a couple of
  • 00:04:58
    motions Okay so so let's start with
  • 00:05:00
    defining fundamentalism if I'm ever too
  • 00:05:03
    fast just let me know so I'm going to
  • 00:05:06
    specifically cite a study by um Jonathan
  • 00:05:10
    J Edwards where he defines
  • 00:05:12
    fundamentalism as a principle belief
  • 00:05:14
    that the Bible is inherently true and
  • 00:05:16
    without error obviously this particular
  • 00:05:18
    study was referencing Christian
  • 00:05:20
    fundamentalism but I think even if we
  • 00:05:22
    were going to apply it to things like
  • 00:05:24
    Islam or Hinduism it would still kind of
  • 00:05:27
    follow the same gist which is basically
  • 00:05:30
    a belief a principal belief specifically
  • 00:05:32
    meaning that regardless of what happens
  • 00:05:34
    around you you still believe that your
  • 00:05:36
    scripture is inherently true and without
  • 00:05:38
    error therefore cannot be questioned um
  • 00:05:41
    it follows a belief of premillennialism
  • 00:05:43
    which is an idea that the deterioration
  • 00:05:46
    of spirituality is an inevitable event
  • 00:05:49
    so here we can see the key themes of
  • 00:05:50
    fundamentalism already which means
  • 00:05:52
    regardless of what type of
  • 00:05:53
    fundamentalist you are or to what extent
  • 00:05:55
    you practice fundamentalism you are
  • 00:05:57
    likely to still believe in these two
  • 00:06:00
    things which is one that whatever
  • 00:06:02
    religion you're following is true 100%
  • 00:06:04
    And any questioning of it is probably
  • 00:06:05
    going to be perceived as a threat but
  • 00:06:08
    secondly um that people are going to
  • 00:06:11
    walk away from this path over time and
  • 00:06:13
    you know you need to fight against it so
  • 00:06:15
    the specific thing I want to point out
  • 00:06:17
    is that in my opinion fundamentalism is
  • 00:06:20
    one of the best
  • 00:06:22
    documented U materializations of A
  • 00:06:25
    Collective Dogma what do I mean when I
  • 00:06:27
    say Dogma I mean a group of indiv ual or
  • 00:06:30
    at least an individual who truly truly
  • 00:06:33
    believes that something is true to an
  • 00:06:36
    extent where they don't view it to be
  • 00:06:38
    something as unquestioned as sorry they
  • 00:06:40
    don't view it to be something that can
  • 00:06:42
    be questioned and you know how sometimes
  • 00:06:46
    you kind of just Gaslight yourself into
  • 00:06:48
    believing something is true I think if
  • 00:06:49
    any of us are religious we will
  • 00:06:51
    understand the idea that you're
  • 00:06:53
    indoctrinated to an extent where even
  • 00:06:54
    just questioning that religion makes you
  • 00:06:56
    feel some sense of guilt so
  • 00:06:58
    fundamentalism is the outcome of a bunch
  • 00:07:01
    of people doing that at the same time
  • 00:07:03
    meeting each other and you know kind of
  • 00:07:05
    sticking together to fight for that
  • 00:07:06
    cause a couple of questions which exist
  • 00:07:09
    in Academia include whether or not
  • 00:07:11
    fundamentalism is something which is
  • 00:07:13
    truly political uh whether it's an
  • 00:07:15
    intellectual ideology or something which
  • 00:07:17
    is reactionary and we're going to
  • 00:07:18
    explore this in a second but just as a
  • 00:07:21
    quick introduction um when I say whether
  • 00:07:24
    or not when I ask whether or not it's
  • 00:07:26
    inherently political the question is if
  • 00:07:29
    you believe believe that the Bible is
  • 00:07:30
    inherently true does that have anything
  • 00:07:32
    to do with the country's governance is
  • 00:07:34
    it something which should be imposed on
  • 00:07:36
    a country's governance what you will
  • 00:07:38
    find throughout this lecture is that in
  • 00:07:40
    a lot of cases or at least in the cases
  • 00:07:42
    which seem to matter most a lot of the
  • 00:07:44
    time it has been considered to be
  • 00:07:46
    political and to be relevant to a
  • 00:07:47
    country's governance at least to a
  • 00:07:49
    certain extent in terms of whether or
  • 00:07:51
    not it is intellectual or reactionary
  • 00:07:53
    and by reactionary I simply mean that
  • 00:07:55
    like is it if I think cause is it
  • 00:07:57
    someone something which mobilizes people
  • 00:07:59
    to go on the street or whether it's
  • 00:08:01
    simply just an ideology which exists in
  • 00:08:03
    books it seems to be a mix of both in
  • 00:08:05
    other words the intellectual ideology of
  • 00:08:07
    fundamentalism seems to fuel the
  • 00:08:09
    reactionary nature of the movement um
  • 00:08:12
    but the number of people who engage in
  • 00:08:13
    it as an ideology seems to be much much
  • 00:08:16
    bigger than those who are actually
  • 00:08:18
    reactionary the best documented example
  • 00:08:20
    of this would be the American Protestant
  • 00:08:22
    Christians so one thing that we need to
  • 00:08:25
    get made clear from the beginning is the
  • 00:08:27
    difference between Protestants and
  • 00:08:29
    Catholics if any of this is not 100%
  • 00:08:32
    correct and somebody knows it's not 100%
  • 00:08:34
    correct I hope you forgive me because
  • 00:08:36
    I'm not Christian but based on what I've
  • 00:08:38
    read Protestant oh sorry Catholic
  • 00:08:41
    Catholics are essentially the sect of
  • 00:08:44
    Christianity which believe that religion
  • 00:08:47
    is something which can evolve with time
  • 00:08:49
    not necessarily evolve but can adapt and
  • 00:08:51
    can survive throughout
  • 00:08:53
    modernization Protestants are people who
  • 00:08:55
    often believe that we cannot stray from
  • 00:08:59
    the old ways or from the traditions of
  • 00:09:01
    Christianity and therefore they're more
  • 00:09:03
    likely to be fundamentalists um in fact
  • 00:09:06
    the biggest fundamentalist movement
  • 00:09:08
    which we're going to learn about in a
  • 00:09:09
    second in the 1920s in the US were a
  • 00:09:12
    Protestant movement and to this day
  • 00:09:15
    Protestants are often more political
  • 00:09:17
    than
  • 00:09:18
    Catholics okay so the specific mechanism
  • 00:09:23
    that I want to introduce in this lecture
  • 00:09:25
    is how fundamentalism kind of mobilizes
  • 00:09:28
    inov self and this is a very interesting
  • 00:09:32
    um Theory brought up by a scholar name
  • 00:09:35
    that I cited just now Jonathan J Edwards
  • 00:09:37
    so he puts out three steps which help to
  • 00:09:42
    Define fundamentalism as a counter
  • 00:09:44
    movement the thing about this counter
  • 00:09:48
    movement and this is not necessarily
  • 00:09:49
    just fundamentalism but fundamentalism
  • 00:09:52
    is a counter movement because of the
  • 00:09:54
    flow that it followed it is the idea
  • 00:09:56
    that there is it begins with a common
  • 00:09:58
    intimacy so these people in this group
  • 00:10:01
    they share this common Intimacy in this
  • 00:10:03
    particular case it's often the love for
  • 00:10:05
    J sorry the love for Jesus the Bible if
  • 00:10:08
    you a Muslim it would be you know the
  • 00:10:09
    belief in the Quran and this isn't and
  • 00:10:11
    I'll extend a bit more about how this
  • 00:10:13
    isn't just religion in a second the
  • 00:10:15
    second is the observation that there has
  • 00:10:18
    been a negation of this Unity which
  • 00:10:21
    previously led to a form of intimacy so
  • 00:10:26
    if you believed in the Bible the second
  • 00:10:29
    step before you become a c movement
  • 00:10:31
    would be realizing that there are a
  • 00:10:33
    bunch of people going against the Bible
  • 00:10:36
    or no longer following the scripture so
  • 00:10:39
    that becomes the previous Unity that you
  • 00:10:42
    have you feel as if it is something
  • 00:10:44
    which has been betrayed and that hurts
  • 00:10:46
    you because that was your common
  • 00:10:48
    intimacy that's what you had in common
  • 00:10:49
    that's what made everyone brothers and
  • 00:10:51
    sisters in this religion and then lastly
  • 00:10:55
    as a result of that negation comes the
  • 00:10:57
    invoking of a new unity in which this
  • 00:11:00
    group of people who have noticed that
  • 00:11:03
    their previous intimacy has been negated
  • 00:11:06
    now feels um motivated to form this new
  • 00:11:10
    form of collectivization or this new
  • 00:11:12
    group of individuals whose key role is
  • 00:11:15
    to fight against the negation of unity
  • 00:11:18
    which has happened in the past when we
  • 00:11:20
    look at fundamentalism you'll see this
  • 00:11:22
    pattern in which these people they have
  • 00:11:24
    the common intimacy that being you know
  • 00:11:27
    the Bible and Jesus Christ and then it
  • 00:11:29
    feels like that's been negated as people
  • 00:11:31
    tend to stray away as you know when we
  • 00:11:34
    talk about Catholics and Protestants
  • 00:11:36
    Catholics seem to be straying away
  • 00:11:38
    because they're more willing to embrace
  • 00:11:40
    modernity and because of that you feel
  • 00:11:42
    the need to to collectivize and fight
  • 00:11:45
    against the negation of that unity and
  • 00:11:47
    people stringing away pull them back to
  • 00:11:49
    the right path and there's a specific
  • 00:11:50
    word for it it's like rebirth or
  • 00:11:52
    something if I'm not
  • 00:11:53
    mistaken um and this will also be common
  • 00:11:57
    in other forms of fundamentalism like
  • 00:11:59
    Islamic fundamentalism especially if the
  • 00:12:00
    religion is a um what's it called
  • 00:12:03
    missionary in which you the goal of the
  • 00:12:05
    religion is to spread the religion in
  • 00:12:07
    Islam we also see people believe in the
  • 00:12:09
    Quran so and so forth we and then
  • 00:12:11
    there's a negation people feel like
  • 00:12:13
    people are spraying away from the Quran
  • 00:12:14
    you know people are starting to not
  • 00:12:16
    dress or cover up the way that they used
  • 00:12:17
    to and therefore invokes a new form of
  • 00:12:20
    unity in which we have all of these like
  • 00:12:22
    really really conservative Muslims
  • 00:12:23
    fighting for their place in governance
  • 00:12:25
    and politics but again this isn't just
  • 00:12:27
    limited to religion if you were to look
  • 00:12:29
    at other movements in general things
  • 00:12:32
    like um black lives matter there was
  • 00:12:34
    always this common intimacy the idea
  • 00:12:36
    that oh black people deserve to have a
  • 00:12:38
    place in America that was negated the
  • 00:12:40
    moment in which um George Floy was
  • 00:12:43
    killed by a police officer in which you
  • 00:12:44
    notice that the intimacy that America as
  • 00:12:46
    a whole had has in fact been betrayed
  • 00:12:49
    therefore invokes a new unity and you
  • 00:12:51
    will notice this patent over and over
  • 00:12:53
    again I'm saying this now because I feel
  • 00:12:55
    like this is an incredibly important
  • 00:12:57
    Concept in debate in which when you talk
  • 00:13:00
    about what motivates people to mobilize
  • 00:13:02
    what is the Tipping Point that causes
  • 00:13:04
    people to care enough to get on the
  • 00:13:06
    street and fight for
  • 00:13:10
    something um I'll get to that in a
  • 00:13:12
    second and fight for
  • 00:13:13
    something this is one of the ways in
  • 00:13:16
    which you can prove that Tipping Point
  • 00:13:18
    that will cause people to actually
  • 00:13:20
    mobilize against something to answer the
  • 00:13:22
    question on whether or not
  • 00:13:23
    fundamentalism is always against
  • 00:13:24
    modernity in a lot of cases yes um but
  • 00:13:27
    we'll we'll Define modernity in a second
  • 00:13:30
    and what that really means to be against
  • 00:13:36
    modernity okay so here's a new question
  • 00:13:39
    on whether or not uh fundamentalism is a
  • 00:13:42
    product of modernity or tradition let's
  • 00:13:45
    define tradition and modernity first
  • 00:13:47
    when we talk about tradition in most
  • 00:13:49
    cases we're talking about the olden days
  • 00:13:52
    essentially so like for Christianity
  • 00:13:54
    this was the age where church had
  • 00:13:56
    significant governmental power and
  • 00:13:57
    political power um in countries like
  • 00:14:00
    Malaysia this is probably like right
  • 00:14:02
    after Independence when you know mutis
  • 00:14:05
    and religious leaders had a lot of power
  • 00:14:07
    and were able to influence people there
  • 00:14:09
    was that sense of control by these
  • 00:14:11
    religious institutions when we compare
  • 00:14:13
    that with
  • 00:14:17
    modernity when we compare that with
  • 00:14:19
    modernity modernity is essentially the
  • 00:14:21
    idea
  • 00:14:23
    that basically time should progress and
  • 00:14:25
    therefore ethics should progress because
  • 00:14:27
    if you were to learn if you were to take
  • 00:14:29
    a little bit deeper into like the study
  • 00:14:31
    of Ethics you will notice that ethics is
  • 00:14:34
    something which is constantly uh
  • 00:14:37
    evolving and often we consider that to
  • 00:14:40
    be a sign of modern sorry we often
  • 00:14:43
    consider that to be a sign of
  • 00:14:44
    modernization as the world progresses as
  • 00:14:47
    life gets better people are better able
  • 00:14:49
    to question what is right and what is
  • 00:14:51
    wrong people are better able to question
  • 00:14:54
    themselves on what their identity
  • 00:14:56
    is um and therefore you know you know
  • 00:14:59
    the world modernizes and so do ethics
  • 00:15:01
    when we question whether or not
  • 00:15:03
    fundamentalism itself is a product of
  • 00:15:05
    modernity or tradition the argument for
  • 00:15:07
    tradition is the idea that
  • 00:15:08
    fundamentalism is actually the struggle
  • 00:15:11
    to return to Divine practice so we're
  • 00:15:12
    trying to go back and it's motivated by
  • 00:15:15
    a fear of eventually detaching from the
  • 00:15:17
    scripture this can be seen even in cases
  • 00:15:19
    of like just trying to preserve holy
  • 00:15:21
    scriptures things like the Bible and the
  • 00:15:22
    Quran so that would be the theory that
  • 00:15:24
    it comes from tradition when you
  • 00:15:27
    consider um
  • 00:15:30
    modernity and this is the opinion that I
  • 00:15:32
    prefer but both are going to be useful
  • 00:15:34
    in debates as to how these groups
  • 00:15:35
    function modernity people argue sorry
  • 00:15:39
    Scholars have argued that as the economy
  • 00:15:41
    got better and people had better
  • 00:15:42
    purchasing power as the world as a whole
  • 00:15:45
    economy started increasing the middle
  • 00:15:47
    class specifically was responded by
  • 00:15:50
    seeking their personal identities
  • 00:15:53
    because now that you're not like working
  • 00:15:54
    in a coal mine 24/7 you can think about
  • 00:15:57
    what type of person you want to be in
  • 00:15:59
    this world independent of the things
  • 00:16:00
    that you're forced to do because you
  • 00:16:02
    have that free time and the luxury of
  • 00:16:03
    having enough money to have that sort of
  • 00:16:05
    free time but secondly one Trend that we
  • 00:16:08
    see as time goes on is the idea that
  • 00:16:12
    there is a certain type of knowledge
  • 00:16:14
    which is more valuable than scriptures
  • 00:16:17
    specifically empirical or scientific
  • 00:16:19
    knowledge so it is these individuals who
  • 00:16:22
    received more recognition and you know
  • 00:16:24
    just more legitimacy in society the
  • 00:16:26
    modern reaction that we saw which helped
  • 00:16:29
    fuel fundamentalism into what it is
  • 00:16:31
    today is the Feeling by these religious
  • 00:16:33
    leaders or religious individuals that
  • 00:16:35
    they also needed to prove themselves to
  • 00:16:38
    be empirical and to reach that level of
  • 00:16:40
    modern cultural relevance therefore
  • 00:16:43
    causing them to try to return to the
  • 00:16:45
    fundamentals through Modern ways such as
  • 00:16:48
    the publication of many different books
  • 00:16:50
    that we're going to look at in a second
  • 00:16:52
    but lastly and this is more like
  • 00:16:54
    wishiwashi but it's actually very
  • 00:16:56
    intuitive if you think about it as the
  • 00:16:58
    war Dres like as the towers get taller
  • 00:17:01
    as the cars get faster it is pretty
  • 00:17:04
    natural for any religious person to feel
  • 00:17:06
    like the end is near because most
  • 00:17:08
    religions denote that as the world gets
  • 00:17:11
    more uh gets more modern the um the end
  • 00:17:16
    is going to be there like I'm Muslim so
  • 00:17:17
    we believe that if people are racing to
  • 00:17:19
    build the tallest tower then the world
  • 00:17:22
    is going to end soon and that's why
  • 00:17:23
    whenever something is taller than the BJ
  • 00:17:25
    Khalifa I will go to Hajj immediately so
  • 00:17:29
    this is some of the reasons of
  • 00:17:31
    modernization that lead to people
  • 00:17:33
    returning to
  • 00:17:35
    fundamentalism I'm going to answer some
  • 00:17:36
    of the questions in the chat um firstly
  • 00:17:41
    on against modernism um in typical cases
  • 00:17:45
    yes if you follow the theory that it is
  • 00:17:46
    in fact a counter movement and it is
  • 00:17:48
    reactionary then typically
  • 00:17:50
    fundamentalism is in fact always against
  • 00:17:52
    modernism because fundamentalism is
  • 00:17:55
    believed to have started existing in the
  • 00:17:57
    1920s so back the question question what
  • 00:17:59
    was the Tipping Point in the 1920s and
  • 00:18:01
    for most of the world the Tipping Point
  • 00:18:04
    was modernization this is around the
  • 00:18:06
    time when things like cars started to
  • 00:18:08
    exist modern jobs a lot of big big
  • 00:18:10
    corporations started to exist at the
  • 00:18:12
    time life before that was just like
  • 00:18:13
    universities and horses right so this
  • 00:18:15
    modernization is something which
  • 00:18:18
    triggered a lot of Christian groups
  • 00:18:20
    particularly Protestants to go against
  • 00:18:23
    modernism through fundamentalism the
  • 00:18:26
    extent as to which they felt like it was
  • 00:18:29
    actually a threat is to the point where
  • 00:18:31
    they were willing to be militant and
  • 00:18:32
    militant does not mean the Army it means
  • 00:18:35
    like kind of like aggressive in nature
  • 00:18:38
    going on the street you know really
  • 00:18:40
    really pressing politicians this is what
  • 00:18:41
    we call
  • 00:18:42
    militant um the second question is
  • 00:18:45
    sustainability uh fundamentalism as
  • 00:18:48
    belief that past natural systems better
  • 00:18:50
    yeah the idea that the past natural
  • 00:18:51
    system was better is typically one of
  • 00:18:53
    the motivations especially since you're
  • 00:18:54
    trying to return to traditional
  • 00:18:56
    practices which were common back then um
  • 00:18:59
    I wouldn't say on the question is
  • 00:19:00
    fundamentalism just being Orthodox I
  • 00:19:02
    wouldn't necessarily say that um it is
  • 00:19:05
    not necessarily the complete rejection
  • 00:19:07
    of what is happening now it's just I'd
  • 00:19:10
    see the more common practice of
  • 00:19:11
    fundamentalism is that you cannot let go
  • 00:19:14
    of like old scriptures or like criticize
  • 00:19:16
    scriptures in order to reach modernity
  • 00:19:18
    it should be
  • 00:19:19
    moderated in order to ensure that it
  • 00:19:22
    does not go against scriptures um
  • 00:19:24
    fundamentalism and conservatism I would
  • 00:19:26
    say that fundamentalism is a form of
  • 00:19:28
    conservatism so conservatism um like
  • 00:19:32
    academically speaking is typically
  • 00:19:34
    associated with literally conserving so
  • 00:19:36
    it looks like not being willing to
  • 00:19:38
    embrace change as much believing like
  • 00:19:40
    the old days or the better days
  • 00:19:41
    economically speaking conservatism is
  • 00:19:43
    like more power to the free market less
  • 00:19:46
    um what's it called government
  • 00:19:47
    intervention so I wouldn't say that
  • 00:19:50
    fundamentalism is sorry I wouldn't say
  • 00:19:52
    that conservatism is fundamentalism but
  • 00:19:54
    fundamentalism is conservatism they're
  • 00:19:56
    not the same but they're closely related
  • 00:19:58
    and I I would go far say that all
  • 00:20:01
    fundamentalists are conservatives not
  • 00:20:03
    all conservatives are
  • 00:20:04
    fundamentalists uh the last question
  • 00:20:06
    that we have right now is why does
  • 00:20:08
    modernism lead to the idea that the end
  • 00:20:09
    is nearing and what incentivizes people
  • 00:20:11
    to return to fundamentalism the reason
  • 00:20:14
    that modernism leads to the idea that
  • 00:20:15
    the end is nearing is because this is
  • 00:20:17
    typically what is denoted in scriptures
  • 00:20:20
    um like obviously what I can site best
  • 00:20:23
    is going to be Islam because I am a
  • 00:20:24
    Muslim but in Islam there's a lot of key
  • 00:20:27
    uh things about modernization which
  • 00:20:29
    denote the idea that the end is near it
  • 00:20:31
    looks like um the days being shorter it
  • 00:20:33
    looks like like climate change happening
  • 00:20:35
    right now uh because of pollution right
  • 00:20:38
    but in the Quran that's also a sign like
  • 00:20:39
    cold places becoming warm warm places
  • 00:20:41
    becoming cold that's a sign of that that
  • 00:20:43
    the end is near in Christianity the idea
  • 00:20:46
    that people are starting to stray is
  • 00:20:49
    also it's also a sign that the end is
  • 00:20:52
    near judgment is near so a lot of
  • 00:20:54
    scriptures like to quote modernization
  • 00:20:56
    as a form of um like a sign that the end
  • 00:21:00
    is near uh the incentive that people get
  • 00:21:02
    to return I wouldn't use the word return
  • 00:21:05
    but I would use the word turn to
  • 00:21:08
    fundamentalism I would say that for the
  • 00:21:10
    most part it would be fear when we think
  • 00:21:13
    about it would be fear and defensiveness
  • 00:21:16
    when we think about religion it's often
  • 00:21:18
    it's a Dogma it's the thing that you
  • 00:21:19
    believe in the most meaning that to a
  • 00:21:24
    certain extent it's something which is
  • 00:21:26
    unquestionable it's something that you
  • 00:21:27
    must protect at all cost and that's why
  • 00:21:30
    like all religions are so sensitive to
  • 00:21:33
    any form of insult all religions are so
  • 00:21:36
    sensitive to any form of like if you say
  • 00:21:38
    that like oh I don't think your religion
  • 00:21:39
    is real real that's so so so
  • 00:21:41
    disrespectful the reality is I can't
  • 00:21:43
    prove that my religion is real as much
  • 00:21:45
    as I as anyone else cannot prove that it
  • 00:21:47
    isn't real however I'm going to defend
  • 00:21:49
    it with my life either way even though I
  • 00:21:51
    can't give you any scientific evidence
  • 00:21:53
    that is something which is true so the
  • 00:21:56
    incentive is one the idea of protecting
  • 00:21:58
    yourself from an increasingly secular
  • 00:22:00
    World which is willing to question
  • 00:22:03
    religion which can cause fundamentalists
  • 00:22:06
    to become stronger and stronger in their
  • 00:22:08
    actions um but secondly it's also a fear
  • 00:22:12
    that the people around you will not
  • 00:22:14
    benefit from Christ and Heaven the way
  • 00:22:16
    that you wish for them to uh I'll do
  • 00:22:18
    these next two questions before moving
  • 00:22:20
    on to the next slide so uh there's
  • 00:22:22
    another question which ask is there a
  • 00:22:24
    study or data to show fundamentalism is
  • 00:22:26
    growing or decreasing there are a few
  • 00:22:28
    and if you're interested in going out
  • 00:22:30
    and like reading up the best one that I
  • 00:22:33
    can suggest is uh George Marsen he wrote
  • 00:22:39
    what's the name of his
  • 00:22:47
    book fundamentalism and American culture
  • 00:22:51
    that's by George maren that's considered
  • 00:22:53
    like the the most Canon piece on
  • 00:22:57
    fundamentalism so and there's other
  • 00:22:59
    pieces which I would recommend which is
  • 00:23:01
    fundamentalism H and called George W
  • 00:23:03
    bush and the return of the Sacred by
  • 00:23:05
    Claus J milck so these are books which
  • 00:23:09
    and studies which kind of go through the
  • 00:23:11
    data
  • 00:23:13
    specifically um yeah and we'll get
  • 00:23:16
    there's a bit more data near the end of
  • 00:23:18
    the lecture which we can cover also uh
  • 00:23:21
    next question religion support
  • 00:23:22
    fundamentalism is it because they
  • 00:23:24
    believe modernization is against
  • 00:23:26
    conservation since it creates a change
  • 00:23:28
    yeah pretty much I think that's a good
  • 00:23:29
    way of analyzing it leaving in the Bible
  • 00:23:32
    and always tells the truth y uh elina's
  • 00:23:35
    comment is correct never string away
  • 00:23:36
    from tradition and fighting against
  • 00:23:38
    modernisms that is a sign that the end
  • 00:23:40
    is near yeah are people who practice
  • 00:23:42
    more
  • 00:23:42
    fundamentalism practicing atheism I
  • 00:23:45
    wouldn't say so given that
  • 00:23:46
    fundamentalism is dependent on believing
  • 00:23:50
    in some sort of divine truth I don't
  • 00:23:52
    think it's Pro possible to be atheist
  • 00:23:54
    and fundamentalist at the same time but
  • 00:23:56
    I do think it's possible to be atheist
  • 00:23:58
    and conservative although I don't know
  • 00:23:59
    what the motivation would be uh lastly
  • 00:24:02
    do you think fundamentalism has
  • 00:24:03
    decreased or increased due to the
  • 00:24:05
    present globalized World which is so
  • 00:24:07
    fastpaced and the fact that we can now
  • 00:24:08
    get exposed to so many other ideologies
  • 00:24:10
    and believe that's actually a really
  • 00:24:12
    interesting question which we're going
  • 00:24:13
    to answer near the end of this lecture
  • 00:24:16
    on whether or not fundamentalism is
  • 00:24:18
    returning or whether it never left at
  • 00:24:21
    all so we'll get to that in a second and
  • 00:24:23
    I'll try to remember it okay next part
  • 00:24:26
    of the lecture is on the origin of
  • 00:24:29
    fundamentalism so when we compare
  • 00:24:33
    between oh okay when we analyze where
  • 00:24:37
    exactly fundamentalism came from uh
  • 00:24:41
    politically speaking there are two
  • 00:24:42
    arguments one which believes that it was
  • 00:24:44
    from America and one which believes that
  • 00:24:46
    it was from the UK although this is
  • 00:24:48
    something which is not resolved and I
  • 00:24:50
    don't think it's worth analyzing I could
  • 00:24:51
    be wrong maybe in 10 years I disagree
  • 00:24:53
    with that statement but when we analyze
  • 00:24:56
    whether or not it came from the US or
  • 00:24:58
    the UK I think what's most important to
  • 00:25:00
    analyze is what was the political state
  • 00:25:02
    of these countries in the 1920s because
  • 00:25:05
    fundamentalism is believed to have been
  • 00:25:06
    born formerly in the 1920s in one of
  • 00:25:09
    these two countries so if you were to
  • 00:25:11
    look at the state that it was in and
  • 00:25:14
    let's like think a second back in time
  • 00:25:16
    during the 1920s the US was like
  • 00:25:19
    industrializing quite fast growing in
  • 00:25:22
    modernization sorry
  • 00:25:28
    okay sorry um growing and modernization
  • 00:25:31
    uh the government had been around for
  • 00:25:33
    like almost a century at this point but
  • 00:25:37
    when we look at the form of government
  • 00:25:40
    that the US has formed under its um
  • 00:25:45
    Constitution it is one which doesn't
  • 00:25:48
    have an incredibly strong central power
  • 00:25:52
    so the way the US has formed even though
  • 00:25:54
    they have their Congress and like all
  • 00:25:56
    the people in the White House they still
  • 00:25:58
    give quite significant strength to their
  • 00:26:01
    state governments meaning that and
  • 00:26:03
    that's why when we look at the US like
  • 00:26:05
    Texas and New York two different worlds
  • 00:26:08
    like completely different beliefs
  • 00:26:09
    completely different practices um I
  • 00:26:12
    can't remember where Utah is somewhere
  • 00:26:15
    there but Utah is like known to be like
  • 00:26:16
    incredibly incredibly conservative like
  • 00:26:19
    Mormons all live there so what we notice
  • 00:26:22
    is that because there's no true Central
  • 00:26:24
    Power and there's kind of a lot of
  • 00:26:26
    freedom between the different states in
  • 00:26:28
    how you want to govern that country it
  • 00:26:31
    ends up being a very good place to form
  • 00:26:33
    cultural Pockets by cultural Pockets I
  • 00:26:36
    mean these small groups of
  • 00:26:39
    um I mean these small groups of you know
  • 00:26:43
    like communities which believe in all
  • 00:26:45
    these different things for example the
  • 00:26:48
    best example I can give you is like
  • 00:26:50
    boarding schools tend to be cultural
  • 00:26:52
    Pockets because you're secluded and you
  • 00:26:54
    know you kind of have the power to do
  • 00:26:55
    what you want you're more likely to have
  • 00:26:57
    very
  • 00:26:59
    um unique cultural practices within that
  • 00:27:01
    small secluded area if you were to look
  • 00:27:03
    at like the US um certain churches
  • 00:27:07
    became their own cultural Pockets which
  • 00:27:09
    could push their own ideologies because
  • 00:27:11
    of the lack of control from the central
  • 00:27:13
    government especially considering that
  • 00:27:15
    in the US um you're not allowed to like
  • 00:27:17
    endorse or really regulate
  • 00:27:19
    these like religious institutions
  • 00:27:22
    because of like the Constitution freedom
  • 00:27:23
    of religion so and so forth so that
  • 00:27:26
    allowed for things like fundamentalism
  • 00:27:28
    once the ball started rolling which is
  • 00:27:30
    what we're going to get to next Once the
  • 00:27:31
    ball started rolling it was very easy
  • 00:27:33
    for fundamentalists and people who
  • 00:27:35
    believed in the push against
  • 00:27:36
    modernization to kind of
  • 00:27:38
    institutionalize themselves or in other
  • 00:27:40
    words really attach themselves to the
  • 00:27:43
    internal structures of the us whether
  • 00:27:45
    it's through mega churches or prominent
  • 00:27:47
    Protestant organizations when I say
  • 00:27:49
    institutionalized what I'm saying is
  • 00:27:51
    essentially they managed to become
  • 00:27:53
    prominent enough to the extent where it
  • 00:27:56
    would have been too expensive to stray
  • 00:27:59
    from that path and this is what we call
  • 00:28:00
    Path dependency essentially when you've
  • 00:28:02
    built all of these churches when these
  • 00:28:04
    religious leaders have become prominent
  • 00:28:06
    in that area it's too difficult for a
  • 00:28:09
    government or even the churches
  • 00:28:11
    themselves to let go of these
  • 00:28:13
    individuals or to kind of crush these
  • 00:28:15
    ideologies because of how much it's kind
  • 00:28:18
    of seeped into the structures of America
  • 00:28:20
    at the time compare this with Great
  • 00:28:22
    Britain as we know Great Britain doesn't
  • 00:28:24
    have like a really strong Constitution
  • 00:28:25
    it changes a lot meaning that there's a
  • 00:28:27
    lot more freedom freedom for the
  • 00:28:29
    government the central government to be
  • 00:28:30
    like oh you can't do that and you can't
  • 00:28:32
    do that and you can't do that either I'm
  • 00:28:33
    going to change the Constitution now the
  • 00:28:35
    one that doesn't exist um but also the
  • 00:28:38
    political climate at the time back in
  • 00:28:39
    the 1920s to like 1945 is um it was one
  • 00:28:44
    which was much more open to criticism of
  • 00:28:46
    the scripture and one of the big reasons
  • 00:28:47
    for this is because the British monarch
  • 00:28:50
    is mostly Catholic meaning that the
  • 00:28:53
    ability for like the inherent belief of
  • 00:28:56
    the biggest Christian Institution was
  • 00:28:58
    one which is open to modernizing the
  • 00:29:00
    scripture and you know modernizing the
  • 00:29:02
    practice of Christianity in and of
  • 00:29:04
    itself but secondly and what I think is
  • 00:29:06
    really interesting is how secularism was
  • 00:29:09
    viewed because in the US secularism was
  • 00:29:12
    a threat to Christianity but in the UK
  • 00:29:14
    and possibly because it's so much
  • 00:29:16
    smaller and so much more diverse
  • 00:29:18
    secularism is in fact a form of
  • 00:29:21
    protection which means that if we
  • 00:29:23
    separate the church to State then we can
  • 00:29:25
    protect the church from being like
  • 00:29:29
    misappropriated or like abused by these
  • 00:29:32
    leaders or even weakening in strength so
  • 00:29:36
    um going to this question is
  • 00:29:38
    fundamentalism applied to the whole of
  • 00:29:40
    America or only to the northern part as
  • 00:29:42
    in South America we see that there is a
  • 00:29:44
    diverse culture beliefs and one
  • 00:29:53
    second sorry the a cat wants to come in
  • 00:30:04
    okay in terms of the specific area it
  • 00:30:06
    was more of the wher parts and I don't
  • 00:30:09
    mean the Americans as a whole I mean the
  • 00:30:11
    United States of America specifically
  • 00:30:14
    but it would have been areas like Utah
  • 00:30:16
    was well known to be very um
  • 00:30:18
    fundamentalist at is till this day Texas
  • 00:30:21
    is known to be quite fundamentalist so
  • 00:30:22
    if you look at the demographic you can
  • 00:30:24
    kind of already tell which area is more
  • 00:30:26
    likely to be fundamentalist um even if
  • 00:30:28
    you look at the voting map right now
  • 00:30:30
    wherever is more Republican is more
  • 00:30:32
    likely to be um is more likely to be
  • 00:30:37
    fundamentalists or have a fundamentalist
  • 00:30:38
    population on the question on how
  • 00:30:41
    secularism protects um I
  • 00:30:45
    think okay and this is me digging deep
  • 00:30:47
    personally the reason why I as a Muslim
  • 00:30:51
    or you know if I was to imagine myself
  • 00:30:53
    as a Christian why I am pro- secularism
  • 00:30:56
    is because I do not trust politicians
  • 00:30:59
    with my religion so I believe that if if
  • 00:31:03
    you are allowed to use religion in
  • 00:31:06
    politics or if there is no separation of
  • 00:31:09
    whatever religious institution whether
  • 00:31:11
    it's the church or like Islam with the
  • 00:31:13
    government I believe that politicians
  • 00:31:15
    because of the way that they are and
  • 00:31:17
    because of electoral Sciences will
  • 00:31:19
    definitely abuse religion and therefore
  • 00:31:22
    threaten my religion in terms of like
  • 00:31:24
    the image of My Religion people are
  • 00:31:26
    probably going to be less attracted to
  • 00:31:27
    join My Religion because of the way it's
  • 00:31:30
    being used in politics people are going
  • 00:31:32
    to start like voting with people are
  • 00:31:33
    going to become like more radical
  • 00:31:36
    towards each other people will become
  • 00:31:37
    more polarized against my religion
  • 00:31:39
    because they dislike the way that it's
  • 00:31:40
    being used in governance and therefore
  • 00:31:43
    secularism for me and for these people
  • 00:31:46
    you know Catholics in the UK secularism
  • 00:31:48
    is in fact a form of protection against
  • 00:31:50
    this sort of abuse of power um the last
  • 00:31:53
    thing to note when it comes to Great
  • 00:31:54
    Britain is how the channels of
  • 00:31:56
    communication were actually quite
  • 00:31:58
    different back then so what we mean by
  • 00:32:00
    this is when you look at the UK and the
  • 00:32:02
    type of universities they have they're
  • 00:32:03
    pretty it's pretty crazy there right
  • 00:32:04
    like Oxford has existed
  • 00:32:07
    forever all of them have existed forever
  • 00:32:09
    meaning that what is considered to be
  • 00:32:12
    intellectual is very easy to find
  • 00:32:15
    because there's like a couple of these
  • 00:32:17
    very very big institutions which we
  • 00:32:19
    trust to be the sources of
  • 00:32:21
    intellectualism in this country what
  • 00:32:23
    this means if that if you know Mr ABC to
  • 00:32:28
    come forward and be like hey actually I
  • 00:32:30
    believe in this it's incredibly easy for
  • 00:32:32
    the intellectual channels in the UK to
  • 00:32:34
    squash that ideology the formation of
  • 00:32:37
    cultural politics oh sorry cultural
  • 00:32:39
    politics sorry cultural pockets is much
  • 00:32:42
    weaker because of these channels
  • 00:32:44
    compared to the US where information was
  • 00:32:46
    much more like can go where it wants
  • 00:32:48
    people can spread it through their
  • 00:32:49
    little cultural Pockets therefore
  • 00:32:51
    allowing fundamentalism to spread okay
  • 00:32:53
    any questions so far before I move on to
  • 00:32:55
    the next part
  • 00:33:06
    yeah I'm really sorry if the cat is
  • 00:33:11
    noising fundamentalism exess in the USA
  • 00:33:14
    how can idea spread easily um I think be
  • 00:33:18
    careful when you think about the extent
  • 00:33:20
    of fundamentalism I want to make it
  • 00:33:21
    clear I'm not arguing that
  • 00:33:23
    fundamentalism is like the core of
  • 00:33:25
    American politics but it is definitely
  • 00:33:27
    part of of American politics right now
  • 00:33:29
    which means that even though
  • 00:33:30
    fundamentalism has heavily spread itself
  • 00:33:33
    in the US it doesn't mean that other
  • 00:33:35
    things cannot or other ideas cannot
  • 00:33:37
    spread themselves within the US so other
  • 00:33:39
    ideas are still able to spread and
  • 00:33:41
    fundamentalism at the end of the day is
  • 00:33:42
    just another political motivation um at
  • 00:33:46
    this point especially during its rise it
  • 00:33:48
    didn't have any like legal power to this
  • 00:33:50
    day it technically doesn't have any
  • 00:33:52
    legal power unless a politician decides
  • 00:33:54
    to follow through with it however it is
  • 00:33:56
    an ideology which spreads and you or
  • 00:33:57
    precious politicians to act in
  • 00:33:59
    particular
  • 00:34:01
    ways okay let's move on to the next part
  • 00:34:04
    which is fundamentalisms rise to
  • 00:34:07
    prominence so this I'm going to like
  • 00:34:09
    site back something that I said earlier
  • 00:34:11
    which is fundamentalists in the US
  • 00:34:14
    specifically sought empirical
  • 00:34:17
    rationalization and the reason for this
  • 00:34:19
    is
  • 00:34:20
    because one thing that happened in the
  • 00:34:23
    1920s was the um establishment of the
  • 00:34:27
    interchurch World movement the goal of
  • 00:34:29
    the interchurch world movement was to
  • 00:34:32
    formally combine or like streamline
  • 00:34:34
    protestantism into like one world
  • 00:34:38
    movement what the people who started
  • 00:34:40
    fundamentalism believed is that this is
  • 00:34:43
    a form of marginalization because like
  • 00:34:45
    if you centralize protestantism it means
  • 00:34:48
    that you're going to give up power to
  • 00:34:51
    other people essentially to decide your
  • 00:34:54
    religion um so it's a little bit like
  • 00:34:56
    you know how like Islam has like a
  • 00:34:58
    Council internationally they were trying
  • 00:35:00
    to do this with Protestants but
  • 00:35:01
    Protestants felt like it wasn't a good
  • 00:35:03
    idea because of the amount of power that
  • 00:35:05
    it gave to other people to dictate their
  • 00:35:08
    religion they much more preferred the
  • 00:35:10
    local churches that they had this led to
  • 00:35:13
    the release of like books like the
  • 00:35:15
    fundamentals which is considered one of
  • 00:35:16
    the earliest pieces of fundamentalist
  • 00:35:19
    literature so fundament uh the
  • 00:35:21
    fundamentals was volume after volume
  • 00:35:23
    after volume of books which explained
  • 00:35:25
    why fundamentalism is rational why why
  • 00:35:27
    we must return why we must quite
  • 00:35:29
    literally fight against modernization
  • 00:35:33
    but additionally when you consider World
  • 00:35:35
    War I and you know people literally
  • 00:35:38
    facing war that idea of like the end is
  • 00:35:41
    near and I might die tomorrow like
  • 00:35:43
    increases so much to the extent what
  • 00:35:45
    people feel like they're more willing to
  • 00:35:47
    accept so there's two main things which
  • 00:35:49
    contributed to the rise of
  • 00:35:50
    fundamentalist prominence one is you
  • 00:35:53
    know that fear of marginalization and
  • 00:35:55
    the call from fundamentalist leaders for
  • 00:35:57
    people to join fundamentalism but
  • 00:35:59
    secondly the fear of this War caused
  • 00:36:02
    people to be more theological and turn
  • 00:36:04
    to religion leading to fundamentalism
  • 00:36:07
    really having its roots in the
  • 00:36:09
    US um so I'm seeing a question on does
  • 00:36:12
    fundamentalism solely or mainly exists
  • 00:36:14
    in America so it originated in America
  • 00:36:16
    but eventually spread throughout the
  • 00:36:17
    world you'll see it in most places
  • 00:36:19
    honestly like a lot of Europe has a lot
  • 00:36:22
    of Christian fundamentalism however um
  • 00:36:25
    it is strongest in the US to this day
  • 00:36:27
    and therefore when it comes to case
  • 00:36:28
    studies on fundamentalism and trying to
  • 00:36:30
    really show you the mechanisms of like a
  • 00:36:33
    religious Dogma or religious ideology I
  • 00:36:35
    do find the US to be the best example
  • 00:36:38
    but that's not to say that
  • 00:36:38
    fundamentalism doesn't exist anywhere
  • 00:36:40
    else um Muslim fundamentalism goes crazy
  • 00:36:43
    in like Saudi and I think that's like
  • 00:36:45
    not not even like that's quite intuitive
  • 00:36:48
    in Malaysia uh Islamic fundamentalism is
  • 00:36:50
    very strong um I understand that India
  • 00:36:53
    has
  • 00:36:55
    Hindu they have Hindu fundamentalism by
  • 00:36:58
    crime where SP I'm sure you guys know
  • 00:37:06
    um let me look the name hindutva so
  • 00:37:10
    India has hindutva which is a form of um
  • 00:37:13
    Hindu fundamentalism but also seen as a
  • 00:37:15
    form of Hindu
  • 00:37:17
    nationalism uh the next question on the
  • 00:37:20
    centralized channels prevented
  • 00:37:21
    deformation of cultural pockets in the
  • 00:37:23
    UK so how did that prove to be an
  • 00:37:24
    advantage the reason it proved to be an
  • 00:37:26
    advantage and this is a liberal take I'm
  • 00:37:29
    gonna give you a liberal take the reason
  • 00:37:30
    it proved to be an advantage is because
  • 00:37:33
    if
  • 00:37:34
    the if the fundamentalists and their
  • 00:37:37
    small cultural Pockets cannot mobilize
  • 00:37:40
    then they cannot become militant or
  • 00:37:42
    become aggressive and when it comes to
  • 00:37:45
    religion these things tend to be quite
  • 00:37:47
    like reverse progressivism so the reason
  • 00:37:51
    why the countries like the UK are able
  • 00:37:52
    to progress very very easily is because
  • 00:37:55
    of the lack of push back from
  • 00:37:56
    fundamentalist groups because the
  • 00:37:57
    fundamentalist groups were unable to get
  • 00:37:59
    their feet off the ground in the first
  • 00:38:01
    place uh the next one fundamentalism
  • 00:38:04
    basically fights against modernization
  • 00:38:05
    prevents modernized idea which are
  • 00:38:07
    against conservation on religious ideas
  • 00:38:10
    and against rationalized
  • 00:38:13
    ideas
  • 00:38:14
    um I'd say the first part is definitely
  • 00:38:17
    correct it fights against
  • 00:38:18
    modernization uh I wouldn't say it
  • 00:38:20
    prevents modernized ideas I'd say like
  • 00:38:22
    especially right now because of the need
  • 00:38:24
    to seek imperi rationalization they're
  • 00:38:26
    much more like to say that these
  • 00:38:28
    modernized ideas need to be in line with
  • 00:38:32
    the scripture or at least like Divine
  • 00:38:34
    beliefs um prevents modernized idea
  • 00:38:38
    which are against conservation on
  • 00:38:39
    religious ideas and against rationalized
  • 00:38:41
    idea I think they try to rationalize
  • 00:38:43
    religion um and I think that's because
  • 00:38:45
    these people are rational at the end of
  • 00:38:47
    the day they're not just going to like
  • 00:38:48
    willy-nilly say that oh you guys have to
  • 00:38:50
    follow the Bible there is that need or
  • 00:38:52
    like the desperation to prove yourself
  • 00:38:54
    to much of society and therefore they're
  • 00:38:56
    much more likely to rationalize religion
  • 00:38:58
    rather than fight against rationalized
  • 00:39:00
    ideas uh and the way that they
  • 00:39:02
    rationalize religion is by trying to
  • 00:39:04
    fight that these things are Justified
  • 00:39:06
    empirically for us to choose the path of
  • 00:39:08
    the scripture rather than go with
  • 00:39:09
    modernization just because it's like
  • 00:39:11
    convenient and
  • 00:39:13
    capitalistic last one if secularism is
  • 00:39:15
    meant to protect all religions and
  • 00:39:16
    promote acceptance why do we still see
  • 00:39:18
    religious conflicts in secular countries
  • 00:39:20
    like India what exactly post wrong uh
  • 00:39:23
    that's usually like that's a whole
  • 00:39:25
    another topic on consolidation of power
  • 00:39:28
    um there's a lot of ways to consolidate
  • 00:39:29
    power like
  • 00:39:31
    sure typically we don't allow religion
  • 00:39:34
    in governance due to a fear of like
  • 00:39:36
    having this Dogma or divine right to
  • 00:39:38
    rule can lead to abuse of power but that
  • 00:39:40
    does not mean that secular rule cannot
  • 00:39:42
    consolidate power either um if you look
  • 00:39:44
    at countries like the Philippines or
  • 00:39:46
    Myanmar no not Myanmar like the
  • 00:39:48
    Philippines they suffer from things like
  • 00:39:50
    um what's it called like the whole
  • 00:39:52
    family
  • 00:39:54
    political dynasties they have political
  • 00:39:56
    dynasties so there are all these other
  • 00:39:58
    ways secular ways to consolidate power
  • 00:40:02
    but I would say that religion is one of
  • 00:40:03
    the most common
  • 00:40:05
    ones uh how is fundamentalism connected
  • 00:40:07
    to the rationalism of religion
  • 00:40:09
    rationalizing religion is a method of
  • 00:40:12
    promoting fundamentalism so when I say
  • 00:40:15
    rationalizing religion I'm talking about
  • 00:40:17
    trying to present your religion in a
  • 00:40:19
    methodical and in empirical manner so
  • 00:40:22
    it's as if you have like a scientific
  • 00:40:24
    study and you'll see this all the time
  • 00:40:26
    like Christians trying to prove prove
  • 00:40:28
    why it's good to like why holy water is
  • 00:40:31
    the cleanest water on Earth and they
  • 00:40:33
    like look at it in a microscope and they
  • 00:40:34
    freeze it and then when you look at the
  • 00:40:36
    like water flakes it's actually like
  • 00:40:37
    Jesus Christ like that's science right
  • 00:40:40
    you're trying to empirically rationalize
  • 00:40:42
    yourself Islam does a similar thing you
  • 00:40:44
    know studies on why the Islamic diet is
  • 00:40:47
    the best diet for humankind so this is
  • 00:40:50
    these religions trying to rationalize
  • 00:40:52
    themselves and prove to wider society
  • 00:40:54
    that we should return to these
  • 00:40:55
    scriptures in order to live the best
  • 00:40:57
    sort of
  • 00:40:58
    Life all right next slide what does
  • 00:41:01
    fundamentalism look like now in the 21st
  • 00:41:03
    century if we look through this if we
  • 00:41:06
    look through this you'll see that in the
  • 00:41:08
    early 2000s we kind of saw
  • 00:41:10
    fundamentalism coming back so everything
  • 00:41:13
    that I told you just now was like 1920s
  • 00:41:15
    to 1940s then we saw a bit of a break
  • 00:41:17
    and it was like the the secular wave
  • 00:41:20
    where everyone believe that like yeah
  • 00:41:22
    get rid of that get rid of this you know
  • 00:41:24
    religion is your own business got
  • 00:41:25
    nothing to do with the government but
  • 00:41:27
    then in the early 2000s something
  • 00:41:29
    shifted in which 911 happened and 911
  • 00:41:33
    was one of the biggest pushes towards
  • 00:41:35
    the association of political identity
  • 00:41:37
    and religion this was one of the Tipping
  • 00:41:39
    points in society and you know you can
  • 00:41:41
    use this in debate about like how the
  • 00:41:42
    world is now when trying to prove that
  • 00:41:44
    status quo looks a certain way 911 was a
  • 00:41:46
    Tipping Point in society in which people
  • 00:41:50
    started to associate their political
  • 00:41:51
    identity with religion and because of
  • 00:41:53
    that voting behavior was no longer just
  • 00:41:57
    like oh this gender or this demographic
  • 00:41:59
    from this area is more likely to vote a
  • 00:42:01
    certain way suddenly race and religion
  • 00:42:03
    also became something very very
  • 00:42:04
    prominent in predicting voter patterns
  • 00:42:07
    and on top of that politicians responded
  • 00:42:10
    to Bush's Patriots act which is
  • 00:42:12
    essentially a security measure where you
  • 00:42:14
    were allowed to like arrest without a
  • 00:42:15
    warrant was considered fundamentalist if
  • 00:42:18
    you look at it at a glance it doesn't
  • 00:42:19
    seem so but these conservative security
  • 00:42:22
    acts which are so defensive and
  • 00:42:25
    defensiveness is a form of
  • 00:42:27
    fundamentalism because fundamentalism is
  • 00:42:29
    inherently defensive and trying to
  • 00:42:31
    protect themselves from modernization
  • 00:42:33
    therefore this Patriots Act was
  • 00:42:34
    considered like the return of
  • 00:42:35
    fundamentalism in the US fast forward 10
  • 00:42:38
    more years the rise of trump that guy
  • 00:42:42
    who's crazy and you know does stuff he
  • 00:42:46
    was one of the biggest returns to
  • 00:42:48
    fundamentalist patterns in modern
  • 00:42:49
    politics this is when people started to
  • 00:42:51
    get ballsy enough to say that hey let's
  • 00:42:54
    not recognize transgender people anymore
  • 00:42:56
    let's reject gay rights in America you
  • 00:42:58
    land of the free and suddenly you can't
  • 00:43:00
    people have the balls to say that you
  • 00:43:02
    cannot be free in the land of the free
  • 00:43:04
    and Trump allowed and motivated gave
  • 00:43:08
    people it Trump became a Tipping Point
  • 00:43:10
    which made a lot of these like
  • 00:43:12
    fundamentalists brave enough to like
  • 00:43:14
    show their face again and mind you
  • 00:43:16
    people don't consider themselves they
  • 00:43:18
    will not identify themselves
  • 00:43:23
    do fund uh fundamentalists no longer
  • 00:43:26
    will Iden identify with the term
  • 00:43:29
    fundamentalism but it is the traits
  • 00:43:32
    which we see in fundamentalism still
  • 00:43:34
    very strongly exists lastly on how
  • 00:43:37
    voting patterns continued It is believed
  • 00:43:39
    that there are at least at least 5% of
  • 00:43:41
    America that being 15 million non
  • 00:43:44
    denomination n Christians in America
  • 00:43:47
    these are individuals who through one
  • 00:43:48
    way or another can be connected to
  • 00:43:50
    fundamentalism there is probably going
  • 00:43:52
    to be some form of fundamentalist
  • 00:43:54
    culture which affects how they vote
  • 00:44:03
    um uh the question on what is the
  • 00:44:05
    meaning of marginalization by the inter
  • 00:44:07
    Church movement the idea is that the
  • 00:44:10
    inter Church movement was a movement
  • 00:44:12
    which wanted to centralize Protestant
  • 00:44:15
    Christianity into basically one
  • 00:44:17
    institution so a similar example to this
  • 00:44:19
    is the um fatwa Council in Islam which
  • 00:44:23
    is an international Council which
  • 00:44:25
    decides Islamic rulings so the the
  • 00:44:27
    church movement was something similar
  • 00:44:28
    but for Protestant Christians so what
  • 00:44:31
    happened was when this uh organization
  • 00:44:34
    was established a lot of protestant
  • 00:44:36
    Christians felt like this was a threat
  • 00:44:38
    or a form of marginalization to American
  • 00:44:40
    Protestants in so far as it reduced the
  • 00:44:43
    freedom that most churches have to
  • 00:44:44
    decide what are the rulings or what
  • 00:44:46
    should be the method of practice a lot
  • 00:44:48
    of people also felt like it was too like
  • 00:44:51
    um apolitical and they believed that
  • 00:44:54
    themselves as Christians were in fact
  • 00:44:55
    political and therefore felt like they
  • 00:44:57
    were being marginalized by an
  • 00:44:58
    interchurch movement which was basically
  • 00:44:59
    telling them to shut up and that's why
  • 00:45:01
    they felt
  • 00:45:02
    marginalized um children fundamentalist
  • 00:45:04
    has been increase once modernization
  • 00:45:06
    increased at the T of the century that's
  • 00:45:08
    uh this is actually really quite uh
  • 00:45:10
    interesting statement and there's no
  • 00:45:11
    particular answer and it's probably
  • 00:45:12
    something that you're going to go back
  • 00:45:13
    and forth on when it comes to the debate
  • 00:45:15
    on whether or not fundamentalism is
  • 00:45:17
    still here or if it's gone away and this
  • 00:45:19
    is all dependent on the question we
  • 00:45:21
    asked earlier on on whether or not it's
  • 00:45:22
    reactionary or
  • 00:45:24
    ideological so if you simply think it's
  • 00:45:26
    ideological it's much more likely to
  • 00:45:28
    decrease with modernization as new ideas
  • 00:45:31
    come in but if it is reactionary then
  • 00:45:33
    the idea of fundamentalism is actually
  • 00:45:34
    likely to get a lot stronger like if we
  • 00:45:37
    look at the modern day sure it went
  • 00:45:39
    quiet for a while after the 19 after
  • 00:45:41
    like 1945 but I'd say like as
  • 00:45:43
    progressivism increased as like more
  • 00:45:45
    liberal and Progressive rights were
  • 00:45:47
    granted to minorities in a way which was
  • 00:45:50
    like not very biblical or not very like
  • 00:45:51
    muslamic therefore fundamentalism
  • 00:45:54
    returns to fight against something which
  • 00:45:56
    they believe is in fact going against
  • 00:45:57
    the
  • 00:45:59
    scripture did Trump result in a setback
  • 00:46:01
    of the modern world it depends what you
  • 00:46:03
    define by the modern world but I answer
  • 00:46:05
    is intuitive which is yes because he got
  • 00:46:07
    rid of like abortion rights um he's
  • 00:46:09
    really really hurting like gender
  • 00:46:11
    identity rights right now and these are
  • 00:46:12
    all fundamentalist traits so I would say
  • 00:46:14
    yes um but it was you know one step back
  • 00:46:18
    for the modern world one step forward
  • 00:46:20
    for fundamentalism how did 911 bring
  • 00:46:22
    fundamentalism back I'd say mainly
  • 00:46:24
    because the enemy in 9911 was of a
  • 00:46:27
    certain religious identity that being
  • 00:46:29
    Islam other religions felt like it was a
  • 00:46:32
    threat towards them like if Islam is
  • 00:46:33
    willing to go this far to spread their
  • 00:46:35
    message then how far should we go should
  • 00:46:38
    Christians push back further and that's
  • 00:46:41
    why we started to see traits of
  • 00:46:42
    fundamentalism coming back in
  • 00:46:44
    legislation uh last question does Trump
  • 00:46:46
    want to rationalize religion since he is
  • 00:46:48
    often seen to be against religions
  • 00:46:50
    though he is
  • 00:46:51
    fundamentalist I'd say Trump is against
  • 00:46:53
    every religion against Christianity if
  • 00:46:55
    you actually look into it Trump has been
  • 00:46:57
    seen he sells his own Bibles which is
  • 00:46:59
    very unconstitutional by the way but he
  • 00:47:01
    endorses and sells his own Bible in
  • 00:47:03
    schools um meaning that he's not
  • 00:47:06
    necessarily against all religions um it
  • 00:47:09
    does seem like he's trying to
  • 00:47:10
    rationalize Christianity but even if he
  • 00:47:12
    doesn't it's quite clear that he wants
  • 00:47:14
    to push fundamentalist principles by
  • 00:47:16
    virtue of him using the moral ground of
  • 00:47:21
    religion and you might not say this but
  • 00:47:23
    when you question what is right or wrong
  • 00:47:25
    the basis for this is often religion for
  • 00:47:27
    example when somebody says that it is
  • 00:47:30
    wrong to be gay there is no scientific
  • 00:47:33
    evidence that this is something which is
  • 00:47:35
    wrong there is only religious evidence
  • 00:47:37
    therefore beliefs that being gay is
  • 00:47:39
    wrong or the qu Community should not
  • 00:47:41
    exist or that this and that or even like
  • 00:47:43
    a lot of racial theories they tend to be
  • 00:47:45
    rooted in religion which is why a lot of
  • 00:47:47
    conservative politicians can be related
  • 00:47:49
    to
  • 00:47:50
    fundamentalism lastly how did the
  • 00:47:52
    increased uh conservative security acts
  • 00:47:54
    bring in fundamentalism I wouldn't say
  • 00:47:56
    the increase acts brought in
  • 00:47:57
    fundamentalism I would say that it was a
  • 00:48:00
    form of fundamentalism because it was a
  • 00:48:02
    form of protectionism or defending
  • 00:48:04
    yourself from an outward Force because
  • 00:48:07
    modernization globalization means that
  • 00:48:09
    Muslims can now travel from their
  • 00:48:11
    country to the US and because of that
  • 00:48:15
    there was a need to protect yourself
  • 00:48:16
    from these external religions which are
  • 00:48:18
    trying to weaken yours I can see there's
  • 00:48:21
    one more question is science against
  • 00:48:23
    fundamentalism various religious ideas
  • 00:48:25
    are not supported by science yeah um I'd
  • 00:48:29
    say what I've noticed about a lot of
  • 00:48:30
    religions is there is a certain sense of
  • 00:48:33
    acceptance towards sciences and vice
  • 00:48:36
    versa however for the most part A lot of
  • 00:48:39
    the most famous um scientists like
  • 00:48:41
    Albert Einstein were like there's no way
  • 00:48:43
    God exists like Steph Hawking these were
  • 00:48:46
    all people who pushed against so yeah a
  • 00:48:48
    lot of prominent scientists tend to be
  • 00:48:49
    against fundamentalism and believe that
  • 00:48:51
    it's a step backwards lastly so would it
  • 00:48:53
    be right to say that fundamentalism is
  • 00:48:55
    growing today rather than modernization
  • 00:48:57
    uh I'm going to use this to transition
  • 00:48:59
    into the next part there is a theory
  • 00:49:01
    which questions whether fundamentalism
  • 00:49:03
    can actually go away or if it just goes
  • 00:49:04
    back and forth so generally most
  • 00:49:08
    movements will go back and
  • 00:49:11
    forth
  • 00:49:13
    between extremes so like Christian
  • 00:49:17
    fundamentalism it was at an extreme in
  • 00:49:19
    the 1920s one quiet came back in the
  • 00:49:22
    2000s and you'll see this with movements
  • 00:49:25
    in general not necessarily
  • 00:49:26
    fundamentalism things like black lives
  • 00:49:29
    matter that was just the newest extreme
  • 00:49:31
    we had the civil's right movement before
  • 00:49:33
    this a much smaller and kind of less
  • 00:49:35
    important example would be the SAG Afra
  • 00:49:37
    the Hollywood strikes those happen every
  • 00:49:40
    couple decades because of the way that
  • 00:49:43
    the film industry um
  • 00:49:47
    modernizes I'm seeing an opinion which
  • 00:49:50
    is fundamentalism is not going to
  • 00:49:51
    decrease because people don't understand
  • 00:49:53
    Unity because everyone wants the
  • 00:49:54
    religion to rule and all people of
  • 00:49:55
    religion will be blam for one person's
  • 00:49:57
    wrong Taliban is a group of terrorists
  • 00:49:59
    and they want all people to become
  • 00:50:00
    Muslims and anyone refuses yeah Taliban
  • 00:50:02
    is actually an excellent example of
  • 00:50:05
    fundamentalism uh I would say right now
  • 00:50:07
    fundamentalism is less valued than
  • 00:50:09
    science today however uh and this is my
  • 00:50:12
    opinion I think fundamentalism is
  • 00:50:14
    something to be reckoned with I think
  • 00:50:16
    it's something which needs to be
  • 00:50:17
    considered I feel like the reason why
  • 00:50:19
    fundamentalism can get so strong and so
  • 00:50:21
    dangerous is because of the way that
  • 00:50:23
    it's kind of pushed aside and considered
  • 00:50:25
    to be like just this silly extremist
  • 00:50:27
    radical ideology um so I think it's
  • 00:50:31
    necessary to recognize that is in fact a
  • 00:50:33
    force to be reckoned with in order to
  • 00:50:34
    get the full front of political an
  • 00:50:37
    analysis and personally I don't think
  • 00:50:40
    fundamentalism can overpower
  • 00:50:42
    modernization that's just a d arguments
  • 00:50:45
    I would give for that is
  • 00:50:46
    one um internationally governments just
  • 00:50:50
    don't really recognize fundamentalism
  • 00:50:51
    that well two fundamentalism is in most
  • 00:50:55
    cases Grassroots movements or like
  • 00:50:56
    churches and that's still like the power
  • 00:50:58
    Dynamic is just too big to allow for it
  • 00:51:02
    to actually overtake modernization okay
  • 00:51:04
    so we're near the end fundamentalism
  • 00:51:07
    Beyond Christianity so fundamentalism is
  • 00:51:09
    not in fact limited to Christianity
  • 00:51:11
    we've seen multiple cases such as
  • 00:51:13
    hindutva in India um in Malaysia there's
  • 00:51:16
    very strong Muslim
  • 00:51:18
    fundamentalism in terms of um like it's
  • 00:51:22
    very well rooted within the government
  • 00:51:24
    to the point we trying to shift away
  • 00:51:26
    from it isn't possible we can still see
  • 00:51:28
    a lot of religious leaders becoming
  • 00:51:30
    politicians and they're more likely to
  • 00:51:32
    push fundamentalism even if they don't I
  • 00:51:35
    I don't explicitly identify as um what's
  • 00:51:39
    it called if they don't explicitly
  • 00:51:41
    identify as fundamentalists and lastly
  • 00:51:42
    of course the example just now which was
  • 00:51:44
    the Taliban which is probably one of the
  • 00:51:46
    most extreme examples of fundamentalism
  • 00:51:48
    we have in the modern world so in terms
  • 00:51:51
    of the conclusion if we were to look at
  • 00:51:52
    these motions we could there's a quite a
  • 00:51:55
    bit of space for us to think about how
  • 00:51:57
    to apply this information debate and I'm
  • 00:51:59
    going to run through them really quick
  • 00:52:00
    because I have like five minutes left
  • 00:52:01
    first like this house believes that it
  • 00:52:03
    is in the interest of religious leaders
  • 00:52:04
    to forbid the use of artificial
  • 00:52:06
    intelligence for any religious purpose
  • 00:52:08
    so in this sort of motion what you want
  • 00:52:10
    to question is what are the goals of a
  • 00:52:12
    religious leader and it often follows
  • 00:52:14
    the idea of fundamentalism the idea that
  • 00:52:16
    you know the world is string away and we
  • 00:52:18
    need to return people for their sake so
  • 00:52:20
    because you're a religious leader it's
  • 00:52:22
    likely to be benevolent but of course
  • 00:52:24
    there's a world where you can argue that
  • 00:52:25
    religious leaders aren't that that
  • 00:52:26
    benevolent and just want to consolidate
  • 00:52:28
    power but in any way how does artificial
  • 00:52:31
    uh intelligence then blend with that so
  • 00:52:34
    I think if you were government then we
  • 00:52:35
    can very much apply what we've learned
  • 00:52:37
    today the idea that modernization is
  • 00:52:38
    inherently harmful to religion because
  • 00:52:41
    it pushes people away from religion and
  • 00:52:43
    therefore it's quite intuitive why
  • 00:52:45
    artificial intelligence is something
  • 00:52:46
    which would be pushed away or something
  • 00:52:48
    which should be forbade because there
  • 00:52:50
    are traditional ways which are taught in
  • 00:52:52
    every religion which uh should be used
  • 00:52:54
    over AI but if you were in the
  • 00:52:56
    opposition
  • 00:52:57
    you would be giving a much more like
  • 00:52:59
    Catholic type of argument like anti-
  • 00:53:01
    fundamentalist which is religion must
  • 00:53:03
    progress because the people will
  • 00:53:05
    progress anyways um second motion on in
  • 00:53:08
    countries with significant religious
  • 00:53:10
    divides this house would bend missionary
  • 00:53:12
    schools so this question is going to be
  • 00:53:14
    a question of the missionary itself um
  • 00:53:17
    when it comes to religion and religious
  • 00:53:19
    divides it's obvious that because of the
  • 00:53:21
    extent of Dogma that a lot of people
  • 00:53:22
    live in it's going to be something which
  • 00:53:24
    is quite sensitive you then question
  • 00:53:26
    like are these missionary schools also
  • 00:53:28
    something which can incite this sort of
  • 00:53:30
    damage and this sort of like sensitivity
  • 00:53:32
    and therefore you question whether or
  • 00:53:34
    not missionary schools can actually
  • 00:53:35
    achieve their goal of missionary in the
  • 00:53:37
    first place but secondly how people
  • 00:53:39
    respond because note when you feel that
  • 00:53:42
    your religion is harmed or being
  • 00:53:43
    threatened you are much more likely to
  • 00:53:45
    become militant and aggressive in nature
  • 00:53:48
    so in these countries are missionary
  • 00:53:49
    schools able to contribute to the
  • 00:53:51
    aggressiveness or help tone it down uh
  • 00:53:53
    third motion this house believes that
  • 00:53:55
    the current pope should m mate that all
  • 00:53:56
    future po be democratically elected by
  • 00:53:58
    all Catholics um I feel like this is an
  • 00:54:01
    argument on how Christians mainly would
  • 00:54:03
    respond especially knowing that
  • 00:54:05
    Protestant Christians tend to be quite
  • 00:54:06
    critical of Catholics um to the extent
  • 00:54:08
    where they're willing to be aggressive
  • 00:54:10
    and how that would like play out in
  • 00:54:11
    terms of polarization and sensitivity
  • 00:54:13
    last motion this house believes that all
  • 00:54:15
    religious positions should be directly
  • 00:54:16
    elected by members of the constituency
  • 00:54:18
    that they
  • 00:54:20
    serve of the constituency that they
  • 00:54:22
    serve um this again sorry the all
  • 00:54:26
    position should be directly elected by
  • 00:54:28
    members of the constituency they Ser um
  • 00:54:30
    this again is a matter of how much how
  • 00:54:35
    great polarization would occur so
  • 00:54:38
    religion tends to be a case of
  • 00:54:39
    polarization how will this group of
  • 00:54:41
    religious people who truly truly believe
  • 00:54:43
    that this is the only way to live how
  • 00:54:45
    are they likely to respond to any
  • 00:54:47
    changes in the legislation and how do
  • 00:54:48
    they likely want to be governed by their
  • 00:54:51
    local leaders okay so the next motion is
  • 00:54:53
    thank you I'll go through the chat I
  • 00:54:55
    kind of have like one minute
  • 00:54:58
    left
  • 00:55:00
    um as the holy C would adopt the two spe
  • 00:55:03
    church policy is fundamentalism
  • 00:55:04
    intellectual reactionary or just truly
  • 00:55:06
    political overall so this is debatable
  • 00:55:08
    and this is something that you will uh I
  • 00:55:11
    don't have recordings I'm so sorry um
  • 00:55:15
    but if I find some I'll send it to like
  • 00:55:18
    the guy who contacted me and I can share
  • 00:55:20
    with you guys so fundamentalism
  • 00:55:22
    intellectual reaction are just truly
  • 00:55:23
    political overall um I think that it's
  • 00:55:26
    to debate and I think that will be the
  • 00:55:28
    debate in a lot of motions whether or
  • 00:55:29
    not it's just an ideology and are people
  • 00:55:31
    willing to let go of like the reaction
  • 00:55:33
    or whether it's reactionary and people
  • 00:55:35
    will always fight back for the religion
  • 00:55:37
    I'm very much more inclined to believe
  • 00:55:39
    that it's reactionary and that's just
  • 00:55:40
    like my analysis and my observation of
  • 00:55:42
    the world I think people fight for the
  • 00:55:44
    things they love and people love their
  • 00:55:46
    religion that's why they fight in any
  • 00:55:48
    case I do believe that religion is
  • 00:55:49
    political based on the way that it can
  • 00:55:51
    affect the way that you vote and the way
  • 00:55:52
    that you interact the society around
  • 00:55:55
    okay that's all for my session today I
  • 00:55:57
    hope it was good and I hope you guys
  • 00:55:58
    learned a
  • 00:56:00
    lot thank you Thea for such a wonderful
  • 00:56:03
    session it was really knowledgeable and
  • 00:56:06
    it had all the aspects of what it should
  • 00:56:08
    be and we' be really glad to apply some
  • 00:56:10
    of the aspects of fundamentalism within
  • 00:56:12
    the debates and kind of have that sort
  • 00:56:14
    of narrative building and
  • 00:56:15
    characterization within debates as well
  • 00:56:18
    so thank you so much for joining and
  • 00:56:20
    hope we you had very fun audience to
  • 00:56:23
    give the session with thank you I love
  • 00:56:26
    questions it was kind of tricky I was
  • 00:56:28
    under a lot of pressure but you answered
  • 00:56:31
    them very like profoundly incred session
  • 00:56:35
    thank you I have another training
  • 00:56:36
    session with another institution now so
  • 00:56:38
    I gotta go yeah by way thank you so much
  • 00:56:40
    thank
Etiquetas
  • fundamentalism
  • political ideologies
  • modernity
  • religious movements
  • Christianity
  • Islam
  • reactionary movements
  • historical context
  • social impact
  • debate strategies